Rules can also be built as a table structure. Building a rule as a table structure is similar to constructing a sentence rule but the conditions and the result can change for every row of the table. Building a truth table combines a number of conditions into a single place. Unlike more simple rules, truth tables can have more than one result. Example: A truth table recommending different loan packages that evaluated a number of conditions like job type, income, amount of loan, etc., might return a few different options.
Matrix rules allow you to create two axes of decision trees. In the evaluation, each tree is evaluated and the result is the intersection of these two decision trees. For instance, you might have a tree based on jurisdiction (rules about where something happens) and one based on financial assessment (rules based on customers financial profiles). At the intersection of these evaluations, the result (if a loan offer is going to be extended) is returned.
Rules can also be constructed as a sequence of decisions and integrations, where data is passed from one step to another to produce an output. Sequential rules can trigger actions or return data – just like any other type of rule output. Sequential rules are also the basis of combining other types of rules into complex rules where different statement, expression, and table rules can be run – their results combined or evaluated to return a complex decision.
The design studio can be configured to provide an environment where business users can feel comfortable with the construction of rules. This often involves hiding the plumbing (how a rule is called, what is done with the rule result, adding in business concepts as data structures, creating common rule patterns and even high-level rule verbs that use the nomenclature of the business). This removes the business analyst from having to think about inputs/outputs, provides data in a structure that is natural and verbs that use the same language as the business.